Skip to main content

Full text of "Television-Mediated Education for the Visually Impaired : A Longitudinal Investigation"

See other formats


"' * 






TELEVISION-MEDIATED EDUCATION FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED: 
A LONGITUDINAL INVESTIGATION 



Thomas H. Bikson 

Tora K. Bikson 

Samuel M. Genensky 



September 1979 



0HW 



P-6363 







M.C. MIGELMEMORIAL LIBRARY 
American Foundation for the Blind 

15 West 16th Street, New York, New York 
10011 



The Rand Paper Series 

Papers are issued by The Rand Corporation as a service to its professional staff. 
Their purpose is to facilitate the exchange of ideas among those who share the 
author's research interests; Papers are not reports prepared in fulfillment of 
Rand's contracts or grants. Views expressed in a Paper are the author's own, and 
are not necessarily shared by Rand or its research sponsors. 



The Rand Corporation 

Santa Monica, California 90406 



Cj 



111 



ABSTRACT 



Interactive closed circuit classroom television systems were 
installed in two special education classrooms to evaluate their impact 
on learning experiences of severely visually impaired students. During 
a three-year experimental period data were collected from approximately 
14 elementary students measuring achievement, visual -mo tor integration, 
visual memory and relevant social psychological dimensions. Outcomes 
were examined within and between subjects in analyses assessing extent 
and pattern of change over time. Results indicated significant improve- 
ments across measurement areas. Achievement scores approximated grade 
normal by the final year, suggesting that the experimental system 
provided educational opportunities comparable to those experienced by 
the fully sighted. 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/televisionmediatOOthom 



TELEVISION-MEDIATED EDUCATION FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED: 
A LONGITUDINAL INVESTIGATION 

by 

Thomas H. Bikson, Tora K. Bikson, and Samuel M. Genensky 
The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California 90406 



Visual classroom environments can be created for severely visually 
impaired students through the medium of interactive classroom television 
systems that take advantage of TV's magnification, contrast, and bright- 
ness capabilities. More precisely, an interactive classroom television 
system (ICTS) is a multicamera, multimonitor closed circuit TV system 
linking a series of student desks, a teacher's desk, and a room-viewing 
camera. Figure 1 shows a 9-camera, 8-monitor system in an elementary 
school classroom. Such a system permits teachers and their partially 
sighted students to be in continuous two-way visual communication with 
one another. Moreover, it allows partially sighted students to function 
visually in classroom situations that are closely akin to those experi- 
enced by their fully sighted peers; that is, they can read ordinary 
printed matter, look at pictures, write with pen or pencil, do workbook 
problems, correct each other's papers, see the clock on the wall, draw 
or paint. Thus, an ICTS constitutes a complex visual aid that enables 
severely impaired students to make the fullest possible use of their 
residual vision. 

This paper presents the results of a three-year demonstration 
project whose aim was to evaluate the effects of an ICTS on the learn- 
ing experiences of partially sighted elementary school students in 
special education programs in two Southern California school districts. 
The assumption underlying the research was that even severely impaired 
students have residual visual capabilities which, given an appropriate 
aid, can be put to use to maximize learning and provide educational 
outcomes comparable to those of the fully sighted. 



This paper is based on research supported by grants from the 
Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, U.S. Office of Education (con- 
tract 300-75-0123) and from the Rehabilitation Services Administration 
(grant 14-P-55846/9) . For a more detailed account of the research, 
see T. K. Bikson et al., 1979. 






p. 

rr 



CD 
rt 

O 





3 
rt 
fD 

H 

CD 

o 



< 

fD 

n 

Cu 

en 
H 

o 
o 

H 
CD 

H 
ro 
<! 

H- 
CO 

H- 

O 

'< 

W 

r+ 




Subjects and Procedures 

Students in the two participating special education programs were 
eligible to take part in the ICTS project: a) if they were partially 
sighted, i.e., if acuity in the better eye even with corrective lenses 
did not exceed 20/70 but was better than light perception or projection 
alone; b) if, given multiple impairments, nonvisual handicaps did not 
seriously interfere with use of TV controls; and c) if they were 
nominally assigned to grade levels one through six for enrollment pur- 
poses, regardless of actual performance level. A total of 21 students 
met these criteria and became subjects during the three-year research 
project; more than 80 percent were legally blind. Table 1 presents 
information about all participating subjects, including acuity, sex, 
ethnicity, measured IQ, nominal grade level, and age. 

Teachers in the participating special education programs were 
trained to operate both student stations and the master control console, 
As Figure 2 shows, a single student station has the following features: 
a down-pointing TV camera equipped with a 5-to-l zoom lens that has 
close-up capability; a TV monitor mounted at eye level; a light source 
for illuminating reading and writing materials; and an X-Y platform, 
a moveable work surface that has margin stops in the "X" or left-right 
direction and friction control in the "Y" or line-to-line direction,. 
The X-Y platform supports reading and writing materials below the 
student's station camera. An ICTS classroom could have any number of 
stations, depending on the anticipated number of students. For the 
research reported here, Site I had four individual stations and Site 
II, eight. 

In addition to individual stations, each ICTS classroom has a con- 
trol console, typically located at or near a teacher's desk. The con- 
trol console permits teachers to present on any one of the system's 
station monitors, independently of what is presented on any other 
monitor: 1) a full-screen image of the output from any one of the 
system's cameras or from a videotape recorder; 2) a horizontally split 
image of the output from any two of these sources; or 3) a full-screen 
superposition of the output from any two sources. With these system 
capabilities, for instance, partially sighted students can work 



-a 

5-1 
•H 

,a 

H 



CO 
dj w rs 

<! H O O 



Cd OJ rH 

At) 0) 

•H to > 

S M QJ 

O O h-4" 
2 



r4 

CO 
01 

>- 



u 
(U 

o 

5-1 



QJ 
O 

o 
a) 






cd cu rH 

a T3 a) 

•H cd > 

6 m a) 

O O .-4 

23 





CO 




H 




CJ 


rH 


w 




>-> 


0) 


pq 


rH 


p 


X> 


co 


cd 




H 


CO 




H 




CJ 



4J 

co 

•H 



CO 

,£3 m 

oj 4J rs 

o o 



< H 



S H 



cd a) 

a T3 



cd 

S K QJ 
O CJ hJ 
55 



O 



>> 

4J 
•H 
CJ 

•H 

c 

x: 

w 



QJ 

co 



is in 

cn n 



m vd 



O m co 

<THN 



>-o -o- m 






p4 



CT. 



O^ 
CTn 



cn m 

00 00 



00 

m 






rs ro 
00 CM 



LO CN 

-J- H 



u 
v£> <r <r 



rs 

o 



w 



co rs 
m oo 



CJ 



O CO 


vO (Ji in H N cn 


rs rs 


•* N is H (^ CO 



^ 



CN CO CO 
CO CN O 



CO 

rs 



m 



H ION vOOO H 
<f rv is \D LO vO 



^£> i— I t*S -3" CN VO 



co 



v£> m co <r H 



<r <r <r is <^ 

is ^D CN co o 



CO>J^)WHW^WcOvOH 



o 



rs 

CT* 



co m 
rs r- 



as <t rs 

NH CO 



O ON CTn is CN CN CN 

O CTi H vO CO H 0> 



Jjrf JjS 0) QJ QJ QJ Jjj 

o a -u -u 4-i -u cj 

cd cd -H -H -H -H cd 



« pq 



PQ 



O 

M <u a> d 

o -u -u ccj 

cd -H -H O 
H JS JC -H 

c_> 



o o o 

fi G M r* QJ G ^i 

cd cd cj cj +J cd o 

u o cd cd 

•rl 'H H H 

X X PQ pq 

a u 



o 
ti 

cd 

CJ 

H 

4= pq x: 



•h cj cd 



QJ ^ 
•U CJ 
•H cd 



o o 

c c 

cd cd 

cj a 

H -H 

pq x: x 



f^SSSSSS P^Pmf^sSSSSfeSSS^ssfePL, 



o 

o o 



o o 
o <r 



o 

o 



-H 




CN 


CO 


CN 


<t 


CN 




-d- 




3 




s^ 


s^ 


s^ 




"S. 








O 




O 


O 


O 


O 


O 




O 




< 




CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 




CNI 




■u 


















rH 


CJ 


H 










X> 




H 


<D 




rH 


CnI 


CO 


<r 


m 


^D 


rs 




•n 


QJ 


O 


O 


o 


O 


o 


O 


O 


QJ 


X 


4-1 


-H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


rH 


4-1 


3 


•H 
















•H 


CO 


co 
















CO 



o 
o 
<r 

o 

CXI 



ooooo oooooooo 

0>J*ONO OOONNN^N 

CO v£> rH rH rH CN CNrsCNrHrHrHcOCO 

OOOOOOOO 
CNCNCNCNCNCMCNCN 



o o o o o o 

CN CN CN CN CN CN 



no-* m vo 
o o o o o o 



CO o\ o 

O O rH 



CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN 



QJ 
I U 
4J QJ 

a s 

0) 

CO QJ 

QJ B 

U O 

&. W 
QJ 

C 

m-i cd 
o 

CO 

CO T3 
>,rH 
Cd QJ 

& -H 

QJ T3 
N QJ 



•H 

r4 

cd 
-a 

c 
cd 

4-J 
CO 

UH 
O 

^J 

o 
cd 



rHCNco<rinvois cd 



T3 
CO 

u x: 
o 

<4-< CO 
4-1 

QJ QJ 
4-1 T3 



•H 

e 

o 

oj cd 
QJ B 



QJ 
> 

cd 



u 

4-1 

QJ 

S 

•H 

S-l 
QJ 
&, 

5-1 
•H 
QJ 



CO 

cd 
xi 

0) 
•H 



fe 4= -H 



CO JD 
CO 

cd 



u 
o 

•H 

r4 

X) 

OJ 

r4 

r4 
QJ 

H-4 
CO 

cd 

5-i 
4-1 

QJ 
5-i 
QJ 
£ 

U 
O 

0) 

> 
O 

S 

5-J 
QJ 

4-1 
•H 

QJ 

4J 
XI 



4J 
CO 

QJ • 

X cd 

4-1 4-J 

cd 

O T3 

4-1 

C iw 

•H O 

13 U 

QJ cd 

4-1 QJ 

a, >-, 

QJ 

rH 

CJ rH 

cd 3 

QJ 

5-4 QJ 

QJ C 

& o 

CO &0 

4J Pi 

CJ -H 

QJ 4J 

•i-l CJ 

x ai 

3 rH 

CO rH 

o 



c 
o 

•H 

4-1 

cd 

rH 
CJ 

•H 

cd 

e 

5-1 
O 

4-1 

•H 
5-1 

4-1 

cd 





cd 

•H 
O 

O 
CO 

5-1 
O 

c 

O 

•H 

B 
QJ 

cd 
a 

cd 

5-i 
QJ 

4-1 

•H 

0) 

c 

QJ 
> 
OJ 
•H 

a 
cd 

-d 
co 

CO 
4-1 

CJ 

0) 

•r-i 




Fig. 2 — An ICTS student station 



individually on their own materials or all read what is displayed from 
one camera; they can write solutions to arithmetic problems displayed 
on the board without having to recopy the problems themselves; and 
they can fill in the blanks on a superimposed workbook page or correct 
one another's papers. The system's room-viewing camera is mounted on 
the ceiling of the classroom and is run remotely. It can pan and tilt, 
and so can bring virtually any part of the classroom within the view 
of its 10-to-l zoom lens. The smaller Site I system was built first, 
to establish the feasibility of an ICTS classroom (that system is 
described in detail in Genensky et al., June 1974). Successful opera- 
tion of that system led to the construction of the larger Site II sys- 
tem (described fully in Genensky et al., 1977), along with funds for 
evaluating the educational effects of ICTS classrooms. 



When the evaluation of the ICTS as a learning mediator began in fall 
1975 concurrently with the completion of the Site II system, the Site 
I classroom had already had a full year's experience with television- 
mediated education. For purposes of formal evaluation, however, the 
following conditions were established for both sites. Teachers were 
required to have their students spend two hours per day using the ICTS 
for academic instruction in group as well as individualized activities. 
In addition, they could use the ICTS as much or as little as they 
pleased in nonacademic activities such as music, art, and drama. 
Teachers were encouraged to employ ordinary grade-appropriate curricu- 
lar materials (e.g., tests, work sheets, paper-and-pencil games); how- 
ever, actual choices of materials and lesson plans were entirely their 
own. It was hypothesized that such an ICTS program would significantly 
improve the learning experiences of the severely visually impaired sub- 
jects in the demonstration, and that improvements would be more manifest 
the longer the subjects participated in television-mediated instruction. 

Data Collection and Analysis 

Program outcomes for subjects were conceptualized in terms of four 
areas. Of primary importance was the impact of the ICTS on academic 
achievement in basic elementary school skills. Basic skills, for the 
purpose of this evaluation, were restricted to reading and mathematics 
achievement as measured by appropriate subtests of the Comprehensive 
Test of Basic Skills (CTBS). A second area of concern was the rela- 
tionship of the ICTS to visually dependent perceptual-motor skills 
such as visual motor integration (assessed by the Developmental Test 
of Visual Motor Integration, or VMI) and visual memory (assessed by 
the visual sequential subtest of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic 
Abilities, or ITPA) . For the partially sighted students making use of 
residual vision by means of an ICTS, these processes are important 
mediators of information encoding and decoding, and thus could have a 
substantial influence on learning. Third, the project sought to 
determine what effect, if any, the ICTS had on self and social attitudes 
(e.g., self-esteem and peer affiliation) thought to be significant in 
students' school experiences. For this purpose we employed both a 



verbal self-report instrument (the Self Observation Scales, or SOS) 
and a symbol manipulation task using geometric shapes and relationships 
to stand for self and social constructs (the Self Social Constructs 
Test, or SSCT) . In addition we tried to assess facial affect decoding 
and encoding as a subarea of psychosocial function. It was supposed 
that for partially sighted students social competence is in part 
visually mediated — that the ability accurately to perceive and respond 
to social stimuli is an important part of psychosocial development 
which most likely involves successful affect encoding and decoding. 
The latter was measured by the Interperson Perception Test (IPPT) , 
while the former was measured in terms of scores on a facial expression 
production task devised by Ekman and Friesen (1975). 

All measures were administered on a pre-post basis during the first 
year in which a student participated in the project. In succeeding 
years, only psychosocial data were collected on a pre-post basis; for 
other assessments, data from the previous spring served as premeasures 
with new data collection occurring only once at the end of the academic 
year. Where possible, scores were represented in terms of age- or 
grade-level equivalents and/or their distance from an age- or grade- 
normal outcome. Because the number of subjects was small and because 
there was no reason to expect normally distributed data, wi thin-year 
outcomes were investigated using nonparametric analyses relying only 
on ordinal properties of scores. Examining pre-to-post changes was of 
primary interest. For this purpose, Wilcoxen matched-pairs signed- 
ranks tests (within-subjects) were used. Between-subjects comparisons 
exploring outcome differences as a function of site or age group (grades 
one to three versus four to six) were evaluated with the Mann Whitney U 
statistic. 

Longitudinal analyses were undertaken on data from subjects who 
had participated in the project for at least two years, in order to in- 
vestigate changes within subjects over time. For this purpose, data 
were grouped on the basis of "participation year." Defining participa- 
tion years I and II as a subject's first and second year of enrollment 
in the project (independently of calendar year) generated a sufficiently 
large sample for repeated measures analyses of variance. Longitudinal 



analyses employ both time of measurement (pre-to-post) and participa- 
tion year (I and II) as repeated independent factors; where appropri- 
ate, such analyses also treat age- or grade-level as crossed indepen- 
dent factors. Finally, attrition studies were conducted to determine 
whether performance changes established by longitudinal analyses 
should be attributed to the experimental intervention or to selective 
disenrollment in the project. For this purpose, subjects were divided 
into two subsamples: those for whom two or more participation years 
of data were available, and those who participated one year only. All 
outcomes examined longitudinally were also explored on a between- 
subjects basis to determine whether any evaluation variables signifi- 
cantly differentiated the attrition group from the subjects who 
remained in the project. 

Results 

Discussion of results is organized according to the order in which 
outcome areas were described above. Achievement evaluation results 
over the three years of the demonstration generated the following con- 
clusions. First, pre-post comparisons showed ICTS subjects improving 
significantly in both reading and mathematics each year, as expected. 
Further, at the end of the first year the following pattern of gains 
was evident: Older students were significantly further from grade 
normal in both reading and mathematics than were younger students, an 



Instead of using participation year and pre-post change as two 
two-level repeated factors, it would be just as appropriate analytically 
to treat time as a single repeated three- or four-level factor. Our 
choice of the former procedure rested on two considerations. First, 
the decision to include or not include a fall measure collected some 
four months after a spring measure with no school experience inter- 
vening raises several issues that this procedure avoids (e.g., Hammond, 
1979); these issues are further confounded in the case of students who 
changed achievement test levels (Barker and Pelavin, 1976). We thought 
that the chosen procedure would underscore for readers the fact that 
participation year represents different calendar years (and thus differ- 
ing pre- and post-measurement times) for some students. 

It should be noted that each year several younger students were 
unable to perform at the first-grade level and had to be tested with 
pre-academic instruments. For this purpose we used subtests from the 
ETS CIRCUS battery. Results are given in T. K. Bikson et al., 1979. 



outcome to be expected given the cumulative nature of educational 
deficits; and all students performed significantly better in mathe- 
matics (i.e., scored closer to grade normal) than in reading (see 
Table 2). We inferred that relative superiority of mathematics scores 
was attributable to the fact that doing computations requires less 
scanning than does reading. However, students' scores were systematic- 
ally inferior to grade normal in both skill areas at the end of the 
first year. The second year's data revealed a contrasting gains pat- 
tern: Substantially greater improvement occurred in reading than in 
mathematics, so that no statistically significant differences remained 
between scores in the two skill areas; apparently a second year of ICTS 
experience enabled students to learn the visual scanning skills requi- 
site for advances in reading achievement (see Table 3). Finally, by 
the end of the third year of the demonstration, students' achievement 
scores in both skill areas were not significantly different from grade 
normal (see Table 4). 

Tables 5 and 6 present cell means (N = 17) and values of F with 
related significance levels for examined sources of variation in read- 
ing and mathematics scores studied longitudinally. Table 5 treats 
reading results as obtained grade equivalent scores (upper half) and 
as distances between obtained and grade normal scores (lower half); 
Table 6 is organized similarly. As the analysis summary indicates, 
reading scores in grade equivalents exhibit a highly significant main 
effect for pre-post change, a result anticipated on the basis of 
within-year findings. The average gain was 4.7 months in participa- 
tion year I and 1 year 6 months in participation year II, or an aver- 
age gain of 1 year 2.2 months in reading equivalents per year among 
two-year students. While participation year itself yields no main 
effect, the change-by-year interaction terms are significant; reading 
gains are substantially greater in a student's second year, a finding 
that corroborates within-year conclusions. The analysis of distances 
between obtained and grade normal reading scores, in contrast, finds 
no source of variation to significantly influence results. It is 
interesting to note that while lower-level students' scores tend to be 
less distant from grade normal (in part reflecting floor effects) , it 



10 



CN 



rO 

CO 
EH 



on 



on 



o 
u 

CO 

co 
pq 
H 
CJ 







.. 


CO 












4-1 


1 u 












co 


•H 












CD 


00 4-1 












4J 

1 


fH CO 

•H 


m o\ r^- r^ vo 


m cm o\ co 


v£> 






4-1 


T3 0) 


O rH O O O 


O O O rH 


O 






CO 


CO .C 


+ 1 1 1 1 


+ 111 


1 






O 


CD 4-1 












P-, 


pej CO 














CD 












1 


4-> 00 


CO 00 CN LO MD 


HNO 


00 






CD 


CO fi 




• • . 


• 






!-i 


O CO 


O O O rH rH 


O O rH CN 


o 






P-, 
1 


p4 ^ 

CD 
4-1 >-i 


1 + + + + 

CM ON CO -<f LA 


+ + + 

cO 
m cm o x> 


+ 


co 




CD 


CO O 




• • • • 




CJ 




M 


CD CJ 


in cn co <r o 


CM CO rH rH 




•H 




PM 


4-1 C/l 








■U 














CO 

















a 












cd 


CJ 




rH 






^r 


X 


1-1 


B 


CD CO 


O.N HON 


<r \o co co 


CM 


4-1 


cO 


o 


T3 g 




• • • • 




CO 


•u 


j-i 


CO ft 


CM CN O H O 


rH CO O CO 


rH 


s 


CO 

•H 
Q 


M-l 
1 


M O 

CJ 2 

CD 


1 1 + + + 


1 1 + 1 


1 






4-1 


4-1 U 


ONNO Q\H 


in co r^- vo 








CO 


CO o 




• • • • 








o 


CD cj 


<r co <r m cm 


CM CO CM CO 








PL, 


4-1 CO 














CD 












1 


4J 00 


00 CO CO MD ON 


r-» oo oo 


<r 






CD 


co p! 




• • • 








u 


O CO 


o o o o o 


o o o o 


o 






Ph 
1 


Pm X 
CJ 

CD 
4-1 U 


+ + i i + 

X) lj~| v£) 00 v£> 


+ + + 

CO 
CO CO O CO 


+ 






CD 


CO o 




• • • • 








l-i 


CD O 


<r H co m o 


CM CM rH CM 




bO 




P-, 


4-1 CO 








fi 














•H 














T3 


CD 












cO 


CJ 




rH 








0) 


c 


e 


CD CO 


m-jo co<- 


ON CO H ^ 


00 


Pi 


cd 


o 


T3 g 




• • • • 


• 




4-1 


n 


cO r-i 


in <r o o o 


o co o <r 


rH 




CO 


u-t 


!-i O 


I i i + i 


1 1 1 1 


1 




•H 




o s 










Q 


1 


0) 












4-1 


•U >-l 


<r oo co cm m 


O rH 00 CO 








CO 


CO o 




• • • • 








o 


CD cj 


LO rH CO LO rH 


CO CO rH CN 








CLh 


4-1 C/D 














rH 














CD cO 














T3 g 


ON ON ON ON ON 


On On On ON 










CO ft 




• • • • 










!-i O 


v£> LT> CO <T rH 


CO VO rH \D 










o s 


















M 










4-1 


rH 


r-4 










CJ 


H cm n <f m 


rH co in O 


CO 








CD 


CD O O O O O 


CD O O O rH 


fl 








"I") 


4-1 rH rH rH rH rH 


4J CM CN CN CM 


cO 








rQ 


•H 


•H 


CD 








3 


en 


en 


s 








C/l 









CD 

X 

4-1 



X 
CO 

4J 
CO 

CD 
4J 

CO 
CO 
3: 



CD 
3 



CO 
•H 

X 



CD 
H 

O 
CJ 

co 

CD 
TJ 

CO 
U 
00 

4-1 CO 

co pa 
U H 
•H CJ 
M-l 

CD 
00 X 

G w 

•H 
C 4H 

c o 

•H 

00 rH 

CD CD 

X > 

CD 



CD 3 

^ O 

O rH 

CD 

s-c • 2 

CO 4J 

(3 
O 



11 



co 



H 



ON 
I 

ON 



co 



O 
u 

CO 
CO 

pq 
H 
U 







., 


CO 












4-1 


1 o 












CO 


•H 












CD 


00 4J 
C CO 


on r- <r 


t-^ 00 On O" v£> rH v£> 


CM 






1 

4-1 
CO 


•h e 

T3 CU 

co x: 


rH O O 


rH rH O O O O r-\ 


O 






1 1 1 


+ + 1 + + + + 


+ 






o 


CU 4-1 












Pm 


Pd co 












1 


cu 

4-1 00 


co oo co 


ON CO 00 CM rH r-- CO 


00 






cu 


co c 
O cO 

P-I -C 


O rH O 


O O O rH rH rH O 


o 






+ + + 


+ 1 + + + + 1 


+ 








CJ 












1 


cu 

4-1 S-l 


r~- o eft 


UO CO VD rH O rH VD 




CO 

o 




0) 
J-i 


CO o 
0) CJ 


m <f m 


CM CO CO O <r O CO 




•H 




P-I 


4-1 CO 








•U 














CO 














e 


cu 












cu 


CJ 


e 


rH 
CU CO 


ON On 00 


in ON u~| vO CM rH vO 


CM 


4-> 

CO 


CO 

4-1 


o 

J-I 


t3 a 

cO fi 


CM O O 


rH <f CO O O rH CO 


rH 


£ 


CO 
•H 

Q 


u-t 


V-J o 


1 + + 


1 1 1 1 + 1 1 


1 






1 

4-1 


cu 

4J U 


OWN 


<r o <r co rH oo co 








CO 


CO o 


• • • 










o 


cu CJ 


sf m \o 


CO CO <T rH LO rH CO 








Ph 


4J CO 














CU 






CM 






1 


4-1 00 


CO 00 o 


rH r^ cm v£> cm r^- r-~ 


CO 






0> 

(-1 

P-I 


CO C 
O cO 

P-I rTJ 


O rH Q 
+ + + 


CM rH rH rH O O CM 


rH 






+ + + + + + + 


+ 








u 












1 


cu 

4-1 S-l 


oo co cn 


O rH CO rH LO CM CM 








01 


CO O 


• • • 










u 


0) CJ 


h com 


CO CO CM O m rH CM 




00 




P-I 


4J CO 








d 














•H 














TJ 


0) 












CO 


O 




rH 








0) 


c 


g 


0) CO 






ON 


Pi 


cO 


o 


x) 6 


CO CM <f 


CM rH <T CM 00 O O 


co 




4-1 


>-l 


cO U 


• • • 




• 




CO 


<4-l 


u o 


<f o o 


o co <r o o rH cm 


rH 




•H 

Q 




o a 


1 + + 


+ 1 1 1 + 1 1 


1 






1 

4-1 


0) 
4-1 S-l 


iH >H rH 


H co m n is eft c^ 








CO 


CO O 


• • • 










o 


CU CJ 


cm m vo 


m-j m h m h <f 








P-I 


4-1 CO 














rH 
CU cO 
13 S 














CT\ ON On 


ON ON ON On On On On 










cO w 


• • • 












5-i O 


VO -CT LO 


<r r- r-^ rH <f CM \D 










O 2; 


















M 










4J 


h-l 


M 










CJ 


cm m <r 


rH CO O rH CO <f m 


co 








cu 


cu o o o 


CUOOrHrHrHrHrH 


C 








•r-) 


4J H H H 


4-lCNCNCNCNCNCMCN 


cO 








-Q 


•H 


•H 


CU 








d 


CO 


CO 


S 








CO 









12 



-a 

H 



oo 
cx> 

I 



o 
u 

oo 

w 
pq 

H 







4J 

CO 

cu 
1 

•u 

CD 
O 

Pm 


1 
a 

•H 

-d 

CO 
0) 

Pi 


CO 
CJ 
•H 
4-J 
CO 

e 

CU 

x: 

4-1 
CO 

s 


-1.7 
+1.3 


cNioovc>oooor->.^D<r 


CM 

o 

+ 


iHOCNOOiHcOOOtH 

+ 1 1 + + 1 + + + + 


en 
o 

•H 

cd 

6 
a) 


O 

G 
cO 
•u 

CO 

•H 

O 


I 
aj 

p4 
1 

a) 
M 
Pm 

b 

o 

M-l 

1 
■U 
03 
O 
PM 


4-1 
CO 

o 
p-l 

4-1 

w 

0) 
4-1 

cu 

CO 
5-i 
O 

4-1 

Cfl 

cu 

4-1 


0) 
OO 

C 
CO 
,£3 
U 

a) 

O 
CJ 

en 

rH 

CO 
O 

CU 
5-i 
O 

o 
c/i 


7.1 +1.2 5.8 +1.3 
6.5 -0.4 6.7 +0.9 


co m co <r vo <f d co co c^ 


co 

rH 

+ 

St 

o 
1 


NOHOOHHNHN 
+ + + + + + + + + + 

<riHCNCN<rmrHrOCN00 


o-iOootH-^-rHmcomcN 

ro<fr^~d-HHCM<rrvOi 


OcOtHiHcOOiHCvJiHO 
1 1 + 1 1 1 + 1 + + 

r^^£>mv£>oa\o\£>mr-^ 


ino^rimNMnvo^ 


00 
G 
•H 

crj 

Pi 


CU 

o 

a 

CO 
■U 
CO 

■H 

Q 


1 

CU 

u 

1 

cu 
u 
Pn 



o 
M 

4-1 

i 

CO 

o 

13-1 


4-1 

Cfl 

o 

4-1 

cn 
cu 

4-1 
0) 

co 
J-i 
U 

4-1 
CO 
CU 
4-J 


cu 
SO 

c 

CO 

o 

cu 

5-1 
O 

a 

en 

rH 

CO 

O 
!23 

cu 

5-4 

O 
CJ 
C/3 


5.4 -0.5 5.1 +0.3 
7.8 +0.9 6.3 +1.5 


ooiHCNimincNco-<rcx)r^ 


H 

+ 

CM 

d 
1 


tHOOiHtHO^-iHCnIo-) 

+ + + + + + + + + + 
iHcNr^tHinr--r^aNfo<r 


mOiHOcOTHLno-^-rO 
-H O 

THr-^fHO-rHrHCNlt-^COm 


OfOHHcOr-KtHCMN 

+ 1 i 1 1 1 + 1 1 1 

c^ncrncoo\onr-iH 


vooHtHmrHOvor-^r-^ 
H 








cu 

CO 

5-4 


rH 
CO 

B 

5-4 

O 




CJnCnCTiCTiCTnCTnCJscJnCTnCTn 




inmNNcoNinN<t-cr 










■U 

CJ 

cu 
on 


H 

cu o o 

4JHH 

•H 

C/j 


H 
M 

iH^r^OOOCNrOLOvOI^- 
CUOOOOtH<HHHHrH 
■UCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNcNC-M 
•H 
m 


co 
(3 

CO 
CU 

£ 



13 



Table 5 
LONGITUDINAL READING SCORE ANALYSIS 

CTBS READING SCORES (grade equivalents) 

Participation Year 

Change I IT 



Pre 



Post 



3.2 


3.4 


3.7 


5.0 



Source 

Participation Year 

Change 

Year X Change 



.91 


n. s. 


14.29 


.002 


4.05 


.06 



DISTANCE BETWEEN OBTAINED AND 
GRADE NORMAL READING SCORES 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


-0.2 


-2.0 


-0.4 


-2.1 


-0.8 


-2.2 


-1.0 


-1.1 



Source 




F 


Participation 


Year 


.01 


Change 




.12 


Grade Level 




.64 


Year X Change 




.61 


Year X Grade 




.06 


Change 




1.62 



n.s , 
n. s , 
n.s, 
n.s, 
n.s . 
n.s, 



14 



Table 6 
LONGITUDINAL MATHEMATICS SCORE ANALYSIS 

CTBS MATHEMATICS SCORES 
(grade equivalents) 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Source 



Participation Year 

Change 

Year X Change 



Participation Year 
I II 



3.2 3.7 
3.9 4.8 



1.15 


n.s . 


19.87 


< .001 


1.14 


n.s . 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



DISTANCE BETWEEN OBTAINED AND 
GRADE NORMAL MATHEMATICS SCORES 

Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


-0.05 


-2.0 


-0.6 


-1.8 


-0.6 


-1.9 





-1.5 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



.01 
.04 
1.40 
1.79 
.01 
.15 



n.s, 

n.s 

n.s, 

n.s, 

n.s, 

n.s, 



15 



is higher level students whose scores show a net decrease in distance 
from grade normal over two participation years. Comparable findings 
come from longitudinal analyses of mathematics scores. As Table 6 
indicates, mathematics scores exhibit strong main effects for pre-to- 
post change across two participation years. Average gain in grade 
equivalents was 6.8 months in the first participation year and 1 year 
1 month in the second, for an average nine-month gain per 10-month 
school year. Here, however, the change-by-year interaction is not 
statistically significant. The analysis of distances between obtained 
and grade normal mathematics scores, like that for reading scores, 
shows no significant source of variation. It is interesting, never- 
theless, to note the similar pattern of mean discrepancies in relation 
to grade level. That is, while grade level does not yield a main ef- 
fect, the average discrepancy tends to be smaller for younger than for 
older students, while older students show more systematic decreases in 
discrepancy during the two years. 

Attrition studies of reading and mathematics scores indicated 
that sustained academic advances could not be attributed to selective 
dropout. In each outcome area, analyses yielded overall rates of 
change comparable to those provided by the longitudinal study and 
failed to yield either main effects or significant cell contrasts by 
group. However, the change-by-group interaction term approached sig- 
nificance in both reading (F = 4.03, p = .07) and mathematics (F = 2.86, 
p = .12); interestingly, it was the attrition group that tended to im- 
prove more rapidly during the first participation year. Consequently, 
the pattern of gains in basic academic skills established in longitudi- 
nal analyses, if it is biased, most likely overrepresents slower learn- 
ers . 

The investigation of the two visually dependent perceptual-motor 
skill areas yielded an interesting and related pattern of results. 
With respect to visual-motor integration, students' scores showed a 
significant increase in the first year although at post-test they re- 
mained substantially behind developmental age norms. Visual sequential 
memory scores were higher, on average, by the end of the first year as 
well but not by a statistically significant margin (see Table 7). In 



16 



,0 

CO 
H 






in 



CO 

H-l 

H 

co 

H 
S3 

W 
Q 

w 

PL. 

w 

Q 
co 





1 •• 














4-> 4-J 

cn c/i 


1 < 
M Ph 
2 H 
P> 1— I 


o 


in h vo m 


-J-vTJC0<r00>*rH<r 






O CD 
Pl, 4-J 


<r 


iH cn t-h 


fC) H H ^O CM 






+ 


+ 1+1 


+ + 1 + + 1 1 + 








CD 












l 


4-i bO 

cn p: 

O ct) 

Ph JZ 






CMvOlTiOInin,— |cO 


00 




Ph 






CM rH rH VO CM 










11+ + 1 + + 


+ 






cj> 












| 


0) 
4-1 J-i 






o o 






CD 


cn o 






1 1 1 1 1 1 1 




CO 


rJ 

Cm 


(1) o 
■U CO 






oorNvd-MD-j-vocom 




< 














Ph 














H 


CD 


0) 










h- 1 


CJ 

cd 
1 1 


00 rH 

< cd 






7-\ 






o o 


m 


oo m in cm 


<romincsicMotN 


o 




en 
•H 


in 


v£> tH 


cm rv h m rH • 


CM 




1 


1 + + + 


1 1 1 l ++ 1 1 


1 




l 


CD 
4-) >H 




X* x> o 


x> o o 






4-1 


i 


in m n h 
i i i i 


vD^orNCMmrN^^H 
i i i i i i i i 






CO 
O 
Ph 


cn o 

d) CJ 
4-1 CO 


m 


i i i i 

in o o md 


i i i i i 1 

vD\omvooin\fi/i 








rH rH 


T-\ 








0) 












1 

CD 
>h 

Ph 


4-1 t>0 

cn c 
o co 

Ph J2 


00 


in n. in 


CMOOOOrHCOrHm^O 


CO 




rH 


O rH m 


rH <T rH r-\ 


rH 




+ 


+ + + 


+ + 1 + + + + + 


+ 






C_> 












| 


QJ 

4_l J_| 




o o 


o 






CD 


cn o 


CNI 
| 


H m rH o 

1 1 1 1 


H^o>m\o<f<r<f 
i i r i i i i i 






u 

Ph 


cd a 

4-1 CO 


in 


1 1 1 1 

vd vo in m 


i i i i i i i i 

inm<r^o<r<r<i-rN 




M 














g 


CD 

o 


om Age 
ormal 












C 
cO 

4J 

en 


LO 


cn vo co cn 


o <r co vo i— i r- 


o 




co 
1 


in rH rH rH 
1 1 + 1 


CMCOCOa^rHCNlrH-Cj- 

1 1 1 + 1 1 1 1 


CM 
1 




•H 


u s 












i 


M-l 

CD 

■u u 




O O rH 


a o 






4-1 


00 

I 


HrlHh 
1 1 1 1 


rH\OrH<J-C^COCTirH 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 






cn 
o 


cn o 
a) a 


00 


1 1 

no r^ o m 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

voa\vtiN<rin<j-(N 






Ph 


4-1 CO 












^ 












0J 


1 en 

en ^ 

r4 4-J 


in 
i 


O 
tn CN rH 00 
1 1 1 1 


o 
vo<rrHr-.,_|u~iooc^ 
i i i i i i i i 






60 
< 


(Yea 
mon 


i 

rH 


1 1 i \ 

H 0\ CTi vD 


i i I- ii iii 

OOCNvOvOvOinmrH 






iH 


<-] 


rH rH 








4J 






1— 1 








a 


M 




1— 1 








<ii 


rH 


cm co <r m 


rHCO-J-inv£>1N00O 


en 






■r-) 


CU o 


o o o o 


CDOOOOOOOrH 


a 






43 


4-1 rH 


rH rH rH rH 


4-JCNCslCNCMCMCslCMCN 


cO 






P> 


•H 




•H 


d) 






CO 


CO 




CO 


2 



[n 



a 

0) 

x> 
en 

C 

o 
en 
•H 

T) 

co 
2 

o 

4-1 

d) 

d) 
4-1 

en 

•H 

G 

•H 

S 

X) 

cO 

4-1 

o 
c 

cn 
co 

< 

Ph 

H 



cn 

o 

CJ 

cn 

bO 
C 
•H 
H 
•H 
(U 
CJ 



17 



contrast, the second year's data manifested just the opposite sorts of 
results: VMI scores tended in general to increase but not systematic- 
ally; ITPA visual sequential memory scores, on the other hand, showed 
strong and significant improvements. It seemed likely that visual- 
motor coordination increased as students learned to use the ICTS, 
during the first year of the demonstration. But scanning, as we have 
seen, was more difficult and apparently required a longer learning 
period. Thus, visual sequential memory scores (partly dependent on 
scanning skills) did not evidence significant positive change until the 
second year, during which reading (also scan-dependent) improved as 
well (see Table 8). These conjectures were supported by examining inter- 
correlations among achievement and visually dependent skill scores. 
While ITPA scores were associated with mathematics achievement, they 
were much more closely correlated with reading achievement. The third 
year's outcomes showed further (and significant) gains in VMI scores, 
with subjects topping out on the ITPA subtest (see Table 9). 

Longitudinal results are given in Tables 10 and 11, which present 
cell means and values of F with related significance levels for inde- 
pendent factors expected to influence visual-motor integration and 
visual sequential memory (N = 17); scores represent age equivalents in 
months. The analysis summary in Table 10 (upper half) indicates a 
highly significant main effect for overall rate of pre-post change in 
visual-motor integration, an encouraging result since fall-to-spring 
gains reached statistical significance during only two of the three 
project years. The average gain in month equivalents was 12.1 for par- 
ticipation year I and 14.2 for participation year II, or an average 
gain of 13.2 months in developmental equivalents per year in visual- 
motor integration among two-year students. Dependent measures in the 
lower half of Table 10 represent distance of obtained scores from age- 
normal scores in terms of months. Here the rate of change approaches 
significance, suggesting that students were making strong, stable prog- 
ress toward developmentally normal performance in visual-motor integra- 
tion. In addition, age level significantly influenced scores, with 
older students beginning and remaining much further behind developmental 



18 



00 



cO 
H 



H 

I 



hJ 
H 

H 

W 
Q 

W 

Cm 
W 
Q 

>M 

-J 

oo 





re- 

ost 
ange 


moo 


o 


CN 


r^ 


rH 


CM 


r- 


m 


rH 


en 


00 00 


en 






en 


rH 




m 


CM 




rH 


rH 


<r 




rH 




+ 


+ 


1 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


1 + 


+ 




PM PM r£ 




























u 


cd cd 
+ + 




o 














o 








CD 


r^ 1 1 


1 


rH 
1 


1 


CM 

1 


i 


en 
1 


1 




rH 
I 


1 1 






1 4-1 U 

(U (D O 


1 o o 


r~~ 


r^- 


m 


MD 


<r 


r— 


<r 


m 


vD 


vo cy> 






inn H 


























m cu o 




























Pm 4-1 00 


























< 




























Pm 




























H 


0) CD 


























H 


O MH 




























stan 
om A 
orma 


Ntno 


en 


^0 


o 


00 


^D 




v£5 


<r 


r-- 


(^ o 


m 




r^- 




vD 


CM 


<r 




i 


rH 






CN 


rH 




1 + 


+ 


1 


1 


+ 


1 




1 


I 


+ 


1 


1 




•H M a 




























Q M-l 


CO 




















CO 






1 0) 

4-1 4-) !-J 


o + 




o 








o 


o 




+ 


o + 






h ^ m 
i i i 


1 


rH 

1 


CM 
I 


m 

1 


CM 

1 


rH 
1 


rH 

o 


vD 
■ 


m 

I 


rH m 

1 1 






CO CO o 
O CU O 
Pm 4-J 00 


i i i 

moo 


1 

C^ 


1 


1 


1 

o 


1 


1 


1 

m 


1 


1 

o 


1 1 

m o 






rH rH 








rH 










r-{ 


rH 






CU 




























I 4J 00 

cu en c 
u o co 

Pm Pm rd 


rH r^ o 


m 


r^- 


m 


o 


in 


m 


00 


en 


m 


1^ rH 


CJN 




CN rH rH 


ro 








rH 


en 






en 


CN 






+ 1 + 


+ 


+ 


+ 




+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


1 1 


+ 




U 




























CU 
1 4-1 5-1 


O O rH 


























rH rH rH 
1 1 1 


■ 




1 


en 
■ 


■ 


■ 


1 


CTn 
I 




■ i 






cu en o 
u cu o 


I 1 1 

\D r^ o 


i 


i 


1 


i 
m 


i 

m 


i 


1 


1 


i 


i i 

m oo 






Pm 4-1 00 
























H 




























g 


cu cu 




























d <! co 
cfl S 

4J S C 

en o o 


<t m h 


o 


m 


r^- 


<r 


CM 


rH 


o 


CM 


<r 


C7> 00 


r- 




<r <r rH 
I I + 




1 


en 
1 


1 


+ 


1 


CM 
1 


CM 
1 


i 


en m 
l l 


CM 
1 




•H V4 s 




























P <4h 




























1 cu 

4-1 4-1 U 

en co o 


Mn a\ 
i i i 


1 


rH 
rH 

1 


CT> 

■ 


I 


o 

rH 

1 


1 


O 

1 


O 

1 


■ 


o 

O T~\ 

1 1 






o cu a 

Pm 4-1 00 


i i i 

CO ^O rl 
rH 


1 


1 


i 


1 

m 


1 


1 

ON 


1 

m 


1 

m 


1 


1 1 

IT) \£> 






.- — \ 




























1 en 

CO 4^ 
CU U 4-J 


O 






o 










o 


O 








en CM rH 
1 1 1 


1 


1 


<h 


m 
■ 


00 
I 


■ 


CM 

■ 


rH 
■ 


I 


cn oo 






M « (J 

<; cu o 


1 1 1 

CM o o 


t) 


1 

cn 


i 


i 


1 


i 

CM 


i 


1 


1 


i i 

00 rH 






rH rH rH 




rH 








rH 








rH 


































4-1 




M 
























U 


M 


M 
























cu 


cm en <r 


rH 


m 


<r 


r^ 


00 


o 


rH 


CM 


en 


<r m 


CO 




•r-5 


0) o o o 


CD O 


o 


o 


o 


O 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH rH 


CI 




XI 


4-1 rH rH rH 


4J CN 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM CN 


eO 




3 


•H 


•H 




















cu 




C/3 


on 


on 




















£ 



cu 
u 

o 

CJ 
CO 

oO 

c 

•H 
rH 
•H 
OJ 
U 



19 



CO 
H 



oo 

ON 

rH 
I 

ON 



C/0 
rJ 
.-J 

H 
CO 

H 

W 
Q 

W 

Cm 
w 

Q 

>H 
►J 

CO 







0) 


























1 

0) 


4J 00 
CO C 


o 


O 


co 


00 


<* 


00 




CN 

rH 


O o 


00 o o 
co 






u 


O CO 






1 


+ 


1 


| 


+ 


| 




1 


v — ' 




CM 


Cm J2 
























cj> 




CO 
























CU 
4-1 M 




+ 












O 


CO 


CO cO 






1 


1 


i 


■ 


ON 
1 


1 


m 

i 


CN 
■ 


rH 


no in 


m m in 
i i i 






0) 


CO O 


1 

o 


i 

o 


i 


1 

ON 


1 


1 

o 


1 

vO 


1 


l 1 

vO O 


i i i 

o o o 






Vj 


QJ U 


rH 


rH 








rH 






rH 


rH rH rH 






Cm 


4-1 CO 
























< 




























Cm 




























H 


0) 


a) 
























M 


CJ 


60 rH 
< CO 


























cO 


e C 


O 


O 


co 


o 


V40 


o> 


in 


en 


vO O 


m vd r^ 


co 




4-1 






co 




co 


CN 


CN 


00 


rH 


vD 


rH 




CO 
•H 


o o 






i 




1 


+ 


+ 


l 


1 


l + + 


1 




Q 


MM 


CO 


CO 






















1 


QJ 
4-1 >M 

CO o 


+ 


+ 




+ 


O 






o 


CO 


CO cfl 






CO 


1 




| 


m 

| 


rH 

I 


ON 

1 


ON 
1 


rH 

I 


vo in 
i i 


co in in 
i i i 






o 


QJ U 


1 

o 


i 

o 


1 

CO 


1 

o 


1 

m 


1 


1 

On 


1 


i i 

nO O 


i i i 

r^ o o 






Cm 


4-1 C/2 


rH 


H 




rH 










rH 


rH rH 








0) 


























1 


4-1 00 


























QJ 


CO C 


m 


H 


00 


On 


o 


<r 


VO 


o 


CN O 


OM^ 


MD 




}m 


O cO 


co 


rH 




rH 


rH 






CO 


rH 


CO rH 






Cm 


CM rC 

u 

0) 
4-1 U 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 

O 


1 


+ 


+ 1 1 

o 


+ 




1 


m 
i 


ON 
| 


rH 
1 


1 


On 
1 


CO 
1 


rH 

1 


1 


O n£> 
I i 


rH CN VO 
1 1 1 






0) 
U 


CO o 


i 


rH 
rH 


1 


1 


1 


1 

m 


1 


1 

On 


1 1 

m on 


1 1 1 

vo r^- on 






Cm 


4-1 CO 
























h- 1 




























|S 


0) 

a 


01 

00 rH 


























pi 
co 


<; co 


CN 


O 


vO 


r^. 


On 


CN 


<r 


CO 


CN vO 


O O CO 


■<r 




e ft 

o o 


CN 


rH 


rH 




co 


CN 




00 


CN rH 


<r <r cn 


Csl 




■U 
CO 


1 


+ 


1 


+ 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 1 


I I i 


i 




•H 


>m a 


























Q 


MM 

4-1 U 
















O 




rH 






1 

•U 


■ 


00 
■ 


ON 

1 


H 
i 


■ 


r*. 
i 


1 


rH 

I 


O \4t> 
1 1 


<r nh 
i i i 






CO 
O 


CO o 


i 


1 

CN1 

rH 


1 


1 

rH 
rH 


i 

in 


■ 

in 


1 


1 


1 1 

vO on 


i i i 

on v£> r-» 






CM 


4J CO 




























^ 




























CO 

CO r£ 

U 4-1 




o 






o 








o o 


rH O 






cu 


1 


rH 
■ 


rH 
1 


1 


rH 

1 


m 
■ 


oo 

■ 


ON 
i 


rH rH 

1 1 


00 rH rH 
l l l 






60 

< 


(Yea 
mon 


1 

rH 


1 

rH 


1 


1 

O 


J 

00 


i 


i 


1 

CO 


1 1 

r- O 


1 1 1 

CN On ON 






rH 


rH 




rH 








rH 


rH 


rH 


































4-1 








H 




















CJ 


M 






H 




















CU 


co 


■<r 


r~- 


rH 


<r 


r^- 


00 


o 


CN CO 


in \o n 


CO 






1-1 


CU O 


o 


O 


CU o 


o 


o 


O 


rH 


rH rH 


rH rH rH 


ti 






x> 


U rH 


rH 


rH 


4-1 CM 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN CM 


CN CN CN 


cO 






ti 


•H 






•H 














cu 






CO 


CO 






CO 














S 





00 




ti 




•H 




rH 




•H 




CU 




CJ 




T3 • 




Pi U 




O CO 




>^ CU 




CU >, 




rd 




4-1 




co a 




cu cu 




00 i-i 




c o 




CO u 




x: a 




a 




rH 




•> cO 




• C3 




CU -H 




• l+M 




•H 




^ Q) 




JC 




CO 4-1 




QJ 




00 u 




C o 




CO MH 




rfl 




O QJ 




4J 




CU CO 




rH rH 




J3 3 




CO CJ 




QJ rH 




U CO 




o a 




a 




CO O 




ti l-> 




o 




ti aj 




rH 




qj jn 




> -H 




•H CO 




4J CO 




•H QJ 




CO MM 




O Pi 




PL. -H 




<4M CU 




O 00 


• 


ti 


CU 


>N CO 


U 


a x: 


o 


G o 


CJ 


QJ 


CO 


=3 ti 




cr co 


00 


QJ QJ 


ti 


sm 6 


•H 


MM 


rH 


CO 


•H 


QJ U 


CD 


X QJ 


o 


H T3 


J 


rQ ti 




QJ 




rM 



20 



Table 10 
LONGITUDINAL VISUAL MOTOR INTEGRATION STUDY 
VMI SCORES (age equivalents in months) 

Participation Year 
Change I II 



Pre 



Post 



Source 



73.1 


82.4 


85.2 


96.6 



Participation Year 

Change 

Year X Change 



1.46 


n.s . 


14.67 


< .001 


.09 


n. s. 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



DISTANCE BETWEEN OBTAINED AND 
AGE NORMAL VMI SCORES 

Participation Year 

I II 



Age 


Level 


Age Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


-17.0 


-41.0 


-20.6 


-39.6 


-17.3 


-30.5 


-14.2 


-31.9 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Age 
Change X Age 



2 


.98 


5 


.27 




.006 




.00 




.75 



n. s . 

.10 

.03 

n.s. 

n.s, 

n.s . 



21 



Table 11 

LONGITUDINAL VISUAL MEMORY STUDY 

ITPA SCORES (age equivalents in months) 

Participation Year 

Change I TI 



Pre 



Post 



76.67 


92.17 


82.89 


98.0 



Source 



Participation Year 

Change 

Year X Change 



2.36 


.14 


1.69 


n.s 


.002 


n. s 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



DISTANCE BETWEEN OBTAINED AND 
AGE NORMAL ITPA SCORES 

Participation Year 



II 



Age Level 


Age Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


-6.8 


-39.8 


-13.2 


-28.1 


-10.2 


-37.3 


-1.8 


-40.9 



Source 



Participation 


Year 




08 


Change 






01 


Grade Level 




6 


31 


Year X Change 




1 


67 


Year X Age 






00 


Change X Age 




1 


67 



n. s. 
n.s , 
.02 
n.s . 
n.s, 
n. s . 



22 

norms than younger students. Longitudinal analysis of VMI scores, then, 
supported conclusions drawn from within-year data: While students showed 
improvement across project years, measured both as gains in developmental 
months and as decreases in distance from age-normal visual-motor func- 
tioning, they were unable to eliminate the discrepancy between obtained 
and developmen tally expected scores, with older students being at the 
most severe disadvantage. 

Contrasting findings come from the analyses of visual sequential 
memory scores. As Table 11 (upper half) indicates, none of the examined 
sources of variation had a major effect on visual sequential memory. 
Participation year is the strongest independent factor and approaches 
statistical significance, suggesting that the second year of ICTS ex- 
perience was important in promoting visual sequential skills. Outcomes 
at the end of the second participation year averaged 15.1 months higher 
than outcomes attained at post- test time 12 months earlier; these find- 
ings tend to corroborate interpretations of within-year studies (where 
only the second project year produced significant gains) and are 
strengthened by results of the longitudinal investigation of reading 
and mathematics scores. The examination of distances between obtained 
and age-normal scores is summarized in the lower half of Table 11 where 
only one main effect is evident: Older students' visual sequential 
memory performance was substantially more discrepant with developmental 
norms than was the performance of younger students. The cell means sug- 
gest that gains on age norms are found primarily among the younger stu- 
dents, with older students neither losing ground nor advancing. Conse- 
quently, the fact that by the end of the project no significant 
differences existed between obtained and grade-normal scores was pri- 
marily a function of the scores of younger students. These results, 
together with the longitudinal analysis of VMI scores, suggest that it 
may be more difficult for students to overcome deficits in perceptual 
motor skills related to visual impairment than to overcome related 
achievement deficits. If so, it could be supposed that while perceptual 



* 
Age rather than grade level is used as a grouping factor for 

analyses of perceptual-motor skill scores since the instruments are 

normed by age in months. 



23 



motor skills surely facilitate transfer of academic information and 
while some level of skill acquisition is requisite for reading and 
mathematics achievement, age-normal perceptual motor function is not 
necessary to grade-normal achievement. 

Attrition analyses of VMI and ITPA scores leave these conclusions 
unchanged. That is, inclusion of the attrition group corroborated an 
effect for pre-post change in VMI scores and the absence of such an 
effect in ITPA scores. In neither case did the influence of group or 
group-by-change interaction approach significance. Interpretation of 
project results in the area of perceptual-motor skills, then, does not 
involve selective attrition factors. 

The third evaluation area, self and social attitudes, seemed most 
recalcitrant to change. Two different measurement methods were chosen 
to assess a set of attitudes thought to be relevant to school success. 
The experimentally developed Self Social Constructs Test (SSCT), a non- 
verbal instrument that makes use of spatial symbols and their arrange- 
ment to represent self and social schemata, was employed to assess four 
constructs: self-esteem, social distance from teachers and peers, and 
scope of peer attachment. The second attitude instrument employed, the 
nationally normed Self Observation Scales (SOS), is a set of verbal yes- 
no items designed to assess self-acceptance, social maturity, school 
affiliation, and self-security. Results for the two instruments on a 
within-year basis are presented in Tables 12 through 14. As is evident, 
school-relevant self and social attitudes did not show positive differ- 
ence scores over the three years generally commensurate with achieve- 
ment and related visual skill gains. Specifically, the first year's 
data yielded no overall significant gains on any psychosocial measure 
except for social maturity (SOS) , an outcome not specifically associated 
with the demonstration and probably reflective of normal social develop- 
ment with increasing school experience (Table 12) . Somewhat more en- 
couraging results were manifest in the second year's data (Table 13), 
which yielded significant positive changes in self-esteem and peer at- 
tachment or affiliation scores (SOS, SSCT) generated by two quite dif- 
ferent measurement methods. However, by the third year, only small and 
inconsistent changes appeared (Table 14): Social distance from peers 



24 

Table 12 
PSYCHOSOCIAL OUTCOMES, 1975-1976 
SELF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TEST, 1975-1976 











Soc 


tal Distance 


Social Distance 










Se 


lf-Esteem 


from Students 


from Teach 


ers 


Attac 


iment to 


Peers 




Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score Change 3 


Score 


Score 


Change 3 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 
























101 


39 


38 


+ 1 


2 


7 -5 


2 


2 





24 


24 





102 


24 


34 


-10 


7 


10 -3 


6 


3 


+ 3 


23 


18 


+ 5 


103 


26 


27 


- 1 


9 


7 +2 


12 


4 


+ 8 


18 


21 


- 3 


104 


29 


28 


+ 1 


2 


5 -3 


2 


4 


+ 2 


24 


24 





105 


20 


23 


- 3 


8 


6 +2 


11 


10 


+ 1 


21 


23 


- 2 


Site II 
























201 


28 


20 


+ 8 


10 


4 +6 


7 


9 


- 2 


21 


14 


+ 7 


203 


39 


27 


+12 


2 


5 -3 


2 


8 


- 6 


19 


5 


+14 


204 


23 


33 


-10 


6 


2 +4 


5 


2 


+ 3 


2 


13 


-11 


205 


34 


24 


+10 


7 


2 +5 


2 


2 





23 


3 


+20 


206 


27 


37 


-10 


7 


9 -2 


6 


7 


- 1 


7 


15 


- 8 


207 


34 


32 


+ 2 


3 


4 -1 


12 


2 


+10 


15 


14 


+ 1 


208 


22 


23 


- 1 


2 


6 -4 


2 


5 


- 3 


16 


12 


+ 4 


210 


45 


29 


+16 


2 


9 +7 


12 


10 


+ 2 


19 


18 


+ 1 


Means 


30 


29 


+ 1.2 


5 


6 +0.4 


6 


5 


+ 1.3 


18 


16 


+ 2.2 


Range 




(8-48) 






(2-12) 




(2-12) 






(0-24) 





Negative changes are representative of decreased social 
distance (i.e., favorable change). 



SELF-OBSERVATION SCALES, 1975-1976' 





Self 


-Accep 


:ance 


Social Maturity 


Schoc 


1 Affiliation 


Self 


-Securit 


y 




Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 


























101 


65 


61 


+ 1 


53 


54 


- 1 


59 


58 


+ 1 


67 


61 


+ 6 


102 


54 


60 


- 6 


54 


50 


+ 4 


59 


54 


+ 5 


46 


55 


- 9 


103 


56 


63 


- 7 


55 


56 


- 1 


55 


58 


- 3 


65 


66 


- 1 


104 


65 


64 


+ 1 


57 


56 


+ 1 


59 


58 


+ 1 


67 


66 


+ 1 


105 


64 


48 


+16 


56 


53 


+ 3 


57 


33 


+24 


67 


67 





Site II 


























201 


57 


52 


+ 5 


56 


57 


- 1 


31 


44 


-13 


63 


59 


+ 4 


203 


60 


59 


+ 1 


58 


60 


- 2 


61 


59 


+ 2 


57 


57 





204 


55 


56 


- 1 


26 


24 


+ 2 


52 


56 


- 4 


25 


22 


+ 3 


205 


55 


38 


+17 


55 


49 


+ 6 


43 


52 


- 9 


58 


46 


+12 


206 


43 


41 


+ 2 


30 


24 


+ 6 


55 


43 


+12 


34 


37 


- 3 


207 


40 


42 


- 2 


30 


29 


+ 1 


28 


41 


-13 


46 


50 


- 4 


208 


53 


53 





39 


37 


+ 2 


46 


60 


-14 


45 


48 


- 3 


210 


51 


43 


+ 8 


51 


41 


+10 


46 


51 


- 5 


52 


45 


+ 7 


Means 


55 


52 


+ 2.7 


48 


45 


+ 2.3 


50 


51 


- 1.2 


53 


52 


+ 1.0 



T-scores: scales are standardized with x = 50 and s.d. 



10. 



25 

Table 13 

PSYCHOSOCIAL OUTCOMES, 1976-1977 

SELF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TEST, 1976-1977 











Soc 


ial Distance 


Social Distance 










S« 


.lf-Esteem 


from Students 


from Teachers 


Attachment to Peers 




Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- Pre- 


Post- Pre- Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test Post 


test test Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score Change 3 


Score Score Change 3 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 




















102 


29 


26 


+ 3 


2 


4 - 2 


6 5 +1 


17 


19 


- 2 


103 


33 


24 


+ 9 


4 


7 - 3 


6 7 - 1 


5 


12 


- 7 


104 


31 


16 


+15 


9 


2 +7 


2 2 


24 


24 





Site II 




















201 


44 


32 


+12 


2 


6 - 4 


2 12 -10 


9 


16 


- 7 


203 


29 


30 


- 1 


2 


2 


2 2 


24 


21 


+ 3 


204 


24 


41 


-17 


5 


2 +3 


8 2 +6 


3 


2 


+ 1 


207 


36 


36 





2 


2 


3 2 +1 


19 


22 


- 3 


208 


34 


26 


+ 8 


2 


2 


2 2 


24 


24 





210 


34 


31 


+ 3 


12 


12 


2 12 -10 


22 


19 


+ 3 


211 


36 


28 


+ 8 


2 


2 


2 5 - 3 


24 


6 


+18 


212 


22 


20 


+ 2 


6 


5 +1 


5 10 - 5 


3 


4 


- 1 


213 


40 


31 


+ 9 


7 


8 - 1 


12 9 +3 


24 


21 


+ 3 


214 


48 


38 


+10 


2 


2 


2 12 -10 


19 


9 


+10 


215 


42 


27 


+15 


2 


4 - 2 


2 2 


24 


24 





Means 


34 


29 


+ 5.4 


4 


4 - 0.07 


4 6 - 2.0 


17 


16 


+ 1.3 


Range 




(8- 


48) 




(2-12) 


(2-12) 




(0- 


24) 



Negative changes are representative of decreased social 
distance (i.e., favorable change). 



SELF-OBSERVATION SCLAES, 1976-1977' 





Self 


-Accept 


ance 


Social Maturity 


Schoc 


1 Affiliation 


Self 


-Securit 


y 




Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 


























102 


60 


54 


+ 6 


59 


57 


+ 2 


60 


56 


+ 4 


58 


54 


+ 4 


103 


62 


43 


+19 


57 


50 


+ 7 


43 


30 


+13 


66 


69 


- 3 


104 


63 


63 





60 


60 





59 


59 





67 


67 





Site II 


























201 


58 


58 





51 


52 


- 1 


24 


30 


- 6 


70 


71 


- 1 


203 


59 


61 


- 2 


58 


48 


+10 


39 


60 


-21 


55 


50 


+ 5 


204 


53 


50 


+ 3 


44 


24 


+20 


40 


51 


-11 


55 


30 


+25 


207 


61 


49 


+12 


38 


38 





32 


46 


-14 


52 


51 


+ 1 


208 


55 


56 


- 1 


24 


27 


- 3 


51 


47 


+ 4 


36 


34 


+ 2 


210 


60 


54 


+ 6 


54 


53 


+ 1 


43 


27 


+16 


56 


58 


- 2 


211 


55 


48 


+ 7 


33 


28 


+ 5 


36 


36 





51 


37 


+14 


212 


58 


49 


+ 9 


25 


38 


-13 


38 


43 


- 5 


47 


60 


-13 


213 


61 


55 


+ 6 


56 


54 


+ 2 


38 


41 


- 3 


63 


54 


+ 9 


214 


57 


56 


+ 1 


42 


27 


+15 


50 


56 


- 6 


53 


52 


+ 1 


215 


62 


57 


+ 5 


59 


49 


+10 


50 


51 


- 1 


65 


56 


+ 9 


Means 


59 


54 


+ 5.1 


47 


44 


+ 3.9 


43 


45 


- 2.1 


57 


54 


+ 3.6 



T-scores: scales are standardized with x = 50 and s.d. = 10. 



26 

Table 14 

PSYCHOSOCIAL OUTCOMES, 1977-1978 

SELF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS TEST, 1977-1978 











Social Distance 


Social Distance 










Self-Esteem 


from Students 


from Teach 


ers 


Attac 


anient to 


Peers 




Post- 


pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score Change 3 


Score 


Score 


Change 3 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 
























103 


27 


30 


- 3 


5 


5 


8 


8 





10 


19 


- 9 


104 


27 


28 


- 1 


2 


2 


2 


2 





22 


12 


+10 


107 


31 


13 


+18 


2 


4 - 2 


2 


8 


- 6 


15 


12 


+ 3 


Site II 
























201 


28 


43 


-15 


3 


2 +1 


7 


6 


+ 1 


13 


18 


- 5 


204 


25 


25 





4 


7 - 3 


6 


3 


+ 3 


3 


3 





207 


43 


48 


- 5 


12 


7 +5 


12 


12 





24 


24 





208 


25 


41 


-16 


2 


2 


2 


2 





24 


24 





210 


32 


28 


+ 4 


2 


12 -10 


12 


12 





24 


24 





212 


23 


33 


-10 


3 


6 - 3 


8 


12 


- 4 


4 


9 


- 5 


213 


30 


39 


- 9 


2 


4 - 2 


12 


12 





18 


12 


+ 6 


215 


22 


30 


- 8 


2 


7 - 5 


2 


2 





21 


24 


- 3 


216 


35 


26 


+ 9 


2 


5 - 3 


9 


4 


+ 5 


21 


21 





217 


28 


17 


+11 


2 


3 - 1 


7 


3 


+ 4 


12 


13 


- 1 


Means 


30 


31 


- 1.9 


3 


5 - 1.8 


7 


7 


+ 0.2 


16 


16 


- 0.3 


Range 




(0-48) 






(2-12) 




(2-12) 






(0-24) 





Negative changes are representative of decreased social 
distance (i.e., favorable change). 



SELF-OBSERVATION SCALES, 1977-1978' 





Self 


-Accep 


:ance 


Social Maturity 


School Affi 


.iation 


Self 


-Securit 


y 




Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 


























103 


59 


57 


+ 2 


57 


54 


+ 3 


57 


35 


+22 


68 


68 





104 


63 


60 


+ 3 


62 


60 


+ 2 


53 


53 





67 


67 


t 


107 


46 


63 


-17 


21 


44 


-23 


33 


49 


-16 


33 


58 


-25 


Site II 


























201 


61 


60 


+ 1 


64 


64 





57 


57 





64 


62 


+ 2 


204 


50 


52 


- 2 


40 


30 


+10 


55 


54 


+ 1 


48 


49 


- 1 


207 


61 


60 


+ 1 


54 


54 





52 


55 


- 3 


62 


61 


+ 1 


208 


53 


59 


- 6 


52 


54 


+ 2 


55 


60 


- 5 


61 


59 


+ 2 


210 


59 


53 


+ 6 


61 


63 


- 2 


54 


53 


+ 1 


64 


54 


+10 


212 


54 


53 


+ 1 


33 


27 


+ 6 


31 


41 


-10 


47 


53 


- 6 


213 


58 


61 


- 3 


59 


59 





38 


54 


-16 


52 


67 


-15 


215 


59 


62 


- 3 


62 


57 


+ 5 


54 


60 


- 6 


57 


61 


- 4 


216 


60 


55 


+ 5 


54 


49 


+ 5 


40 


28 


+12 


61 


56 


+ 5 


217 


52 


49 


+ 3 


58 


59 


- 1 


56 


55 


+ 1 


36 


46 


-10 


Means 


56 


57 


- 0.7 


52 


52 


+ 0.5 


49 


50 


- 2.3 


55 


58 


- 3.1 



T-scores: scales are standardized with x = 50 and s.d. 



10. 



27 



(SSCT) showed a significant decrease, but school affiliation scores 
(SOS) also yielded a significant decrease. 

Longitudinal repeated measured analyses essentially corroborate 
these conclusions. Results for the three self-oriented attitude mea- 
sures appear in Tables 15 and 16 (upper half). Here it is evident that 
the strongest source of variation in attitude toward self is grade 
level, older students exhibiting more favorable self constructs across 
fairly different measurement methods. Only self acceptance (SOS) also 
manifests a main effect for pre-post change in a positive direction; in 
the absence of support from measures of related constructs, however, 
this outcome is not strongly compelling. Tables 16 (lower half) through 
18 present summary tables for repeated measures analyses of socially- 
oriented measures. As expected, strongest effects for change over time 
as well as grade level are generated by the social maturity measure 
(again interpreted as reflecting maturation). School reflective mea- 
sures, in contrast, show the following results. SSCT measures of peer 
contact tapping aspects of intimacy and extensiveness show that while 
closeness to teachers is unaffected by any independent factor, older 
students seem to have more extensive peer networks and to feel closer 
to other students during the school year. On the other hand, the SOS 
measures of school affiliation evidence a decrease over the school year, 
especially among younger students. These findings have led us to 
three conclusions. First, it would be desirable to locate or develop 
more sensitive and valid measures of self and social attitudes among 
handicapped students. Second, it is possible that the history of often- 
tested severely handicapped students engenders rather invariant failure 
expectations with attendant negative self images that are difficult to 
overcome; we were unable to observe positive changes in self and social 
constructs commensurate with strong gains in achievement and related 
visual skills. Finally, it seems particularly important to give spe- 
cial attention to the socioemotional climate for lower-grade visually 
impaired elementary school students. 

Attrition analyses lend support to some of the conclusions drawn 
from longitudinal studies of socially-oriented attitude measures and 
weaken others. The first variable examined, social maturity (SOS), 



28 

Table 15 
LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SELF ATTITUDES 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



SELF-ESTEEM (SSCT) 

Participation Year 

I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Hi gher 


25.8 


29.3 


34.0 


28.5 


25.8 


36.5 


29.2 


31.5 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



.67 
.52 

2.40 

1.4 

6.15 

3.98 



n.s . 

n. s. 
13 
n.s. 
.02 
.06 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



SELF-ACCEPTANCE (SOS) 

Participation Year 

I II 



Grade 


Level 


Grade 


Leve] 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


52.5 


56.3 


52. 


57.0 


53.2 


58.8 


55.8 


59.9 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



.23 
3.51 
5.56 
.44 
.002 
.03 



n.s, 

.08 
.03 
n.s. 
n.s. 
n. s. 



29 

Table 16 
LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SELF-SOCIAL ORIENTATION 
SELF-SECURITY (SOS) 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


50.8 


55.5 


42.0 


62.1 


48.5 

— 


58.3 


47.5 


60.1 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



.008 

.36 
8.90 

.20 
1.33 

.12 



n. s. 
n. s. 
.008 
n. s . 
n. s. 
n. s. 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



SOCIAL MATURITY (SOS) 

Participation Year 



II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


40.2 


51.7 


29.0 


54.5 


38.5 


55.8 


34.8 


57.5 



Source 



Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



.64 

5.07 

35.23 

1.56 

2.24 

.38 



n. s. 

.04 

.001 

n.s. 

.15 

rt. s. 



30 



Table 17 

LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF ATTITUDES 
TOWARD PEERS 

SOCIAL DISTANCE FROM STUDENTS (SSCT) 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


4.7 


6.8 


3.0 


5.5 


6.0 


3.7- 


3.0 


4.4 



Source 



Participation Year 


1 


.70 


Change 


1 


.24 


Grade Level 




.84 


Year X Change 




.07 


Year X Grade 




99 


Change X Grade 


4 


.49 



n.s. 
n.s. 
n.s. 
n.s. 
n.s. 
.05 



SCOPE OF PEER ATTACHMENT (SSCT) 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


13.0 


18.3 


14.2 


18.4 


12.5 


22.2 


12.5 


17.5 



Source 


F 


Participation Year 


.10 


Change 


.03 


Grade Level 


4.94 


Year X Change 


1.93 


Year X Grade 


.29 


Change X Grade 


1.47 



n.s. 

n.s. 

.04 

n.s. 

n.s. 

n.s . 



31 

Table 18 
LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SCHOOL ORIENTATION 
SCHOOL AFFILIATION (SOS) 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



Participation Year 
I II 



Grade Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


50.3 


52.3 


46.2 


47.0 


41.7 


52.2 


38.5 


45.0 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



1.46 
6.22 
1.46 
.02 
.10 
3.65 



n.s . 

.02 

n.s . 

n.s. 

n.s. 

.07 



SOCIAL DISTANCE FROM TEACHERS (SSCT) 
Participation Year 



Change 



Pre 



Post 



II 



Grade 


Level 


Grade Level 


Lower 


Higher 


Lower 


Higher 


6.3 


5.0 


4.5 


6.8 


5.7 


6.0 


5.3 



4.3 



Source 

Participation Year 
Change 
Grade Level 
Year X Change 
Year X Grade 
Change X Grade 



,23 

,16 
,00 
,12 
,23 
,19 



n.s. 
n.s . 
n.s. 
n.s. 
n.s. 
n.s. 



32 



showed no effect for group or for the interaction of group with rate of 
change. Interestingly, however, when scores of the attrition group were 
combined with scores from the participation group, the rate of change 
was no longer significant. Apparently those who disenrolled were not 
advancing along the social maturity scale as rapidly as their counter- 
parts who remained in the project, although the difference only weakened 
the influence of rate of change instead of establishing a significant 
interaction term. The participation sample, then, included subjects 
whose assessed social maturity may have increased more rapidly than the 
overall rate among the subjects as a whole. 

Similarly, when the school affiliation (SOS) variable was examined 
in this way, it too failed to yield a significant effect for rate of 
change, even though such change had been established in the longitudinal 
analysis. In this instance, the examination also generated an approxi- 
mately significant group-by-rate interaction term (F ■ 2.58, p = .13), 
indicating that the attrition group became less disaffected with school 
during the year than did the participation group. Longitudinal analyses, 
then, may overestimate declines in school affiliation. 

With respect to the two social distance measures (SSCT), inclusion 
of the attrition group in a participation year I analysis produced no 
change in outcomes; means remained stable and no effects appeared for 
group or group-by-rate interaction. Comparable findings came from the 
analysis of the peer attachment measure (SSCT), except that the effect 
for rate of change was much stronger when the attrition group was in- 
cluded in the first year sample. Longitudinal analyses, then, may 
overestimate social maturity and underestimate affiliative feelings 
about the school setting among ICTS students. 

The last psychosocial function measure involved affect decoding 
and encoding. This assessment was introduced in the third year of the 
study on the hypothesis that social perception and social communication 
might be visually based skills that mediate interpersonal behavior for 
visually impaired students in somewhat the same way that visual symbolic 
capability mediates academic activity. If so, then it would be worth- 
while to attempt to understand more about the self-social constructs of 
subjects by assessing hypothetically underlying skills. Table 19 



33 



presents within-year results for the Interperson Perception Test. 
As is evident, at pretest subjects performed poorly on the facial 
affect recognition task (IPPT) , and no statistically significant over- 
all gains in affect decoding were attained. In part the absence of 
recognition gains seemed due to the task stimuli. Although every ef- 
fort had been made to improve the contrast in the standard stimulus 
photographs for the IPPT, subjects still had difficulty discriminating 
facial details. While novel test development lay beyond the scope of 
the project, results from the affect encoding task led us to believe 
that a better stimulus set would have produced better results. 

With respect to affect encoding ("making a face" conventionally 
representative of a specified affect), ICTS subjects scored profoundly 
worse than matched fully sighted controls (Table 20). However, within 
a year their post-test scores compared favorably with the pretest 
scores of the controls; no significant differences remained between 
them. The significant differences of ICTS subjects (T = 0, p < .01) 
are apparent in their pre- and post-photos (Figures 3-7) . Because 
reproduction is usually regarded as more difficult than recognition, 
we suspect that recognition scores are depressed due to an inadequate 
measurement method. We believe that affect decoding and encoding among 
partially sighted students is an area well worth further exploration, 
particularly in relation to development of social competence among the 
visually handicapped. 

In summary, three years of evaluation data suggest that the ICTS 
had a strong and stable positive impact on the learning experiences of 
partially sighted elementary school students enrolled in the demonstra- 
tion classrooms. Effects are most visible in reading and mathematics 
achievement, where students have closed the gap between their own and 
grade normal outcomes. The greatest need is for developing methods to 
enhance self and social constructs, perhaps by using the ICTS to 
facilitate interpersonal competence. Overall it was our conclusion 
that the ICTS can be used to maximize the learning opportunities of 
severely visually impaired students and to provide educational experi- 
ences comparable to those of the fully sighted. 



34 



Table 19 



INTERPERSON PERCEPTION TEST, 
1977-1978 





Pre- 


Post- 


Pre- 




test 


test 


Post 


Subject 


Score 


Score 


Change 


Site I 








103 


5 


3 


-2 


104 


10 


10 





107 


7 


3 


-4 


Site II 








201 


17 • 


9 


-8 


204 


3 


6 


+3 


207 


5 


7 


+2 


208 


9 


9 





210 


8 


S 





212 


7 


10 


+ 3 


213 


10 


10 





215 


14 


11 


-3 


216 


8 


9 


+ 1 


217 


16 


10 


-4 


Means 


9.2 


8.1 


-0.9 


Range 




(0-20) 





Table 20 
FACIAL AFFECT PRODUCTION, 1977-1978 



Matched Pre-test Post-test Pre- 

Subject Control Pre- Post- Distance Distance Post 

(Site II) Score 3 test test from Control from Control Change 



201 5.7 2.6 10.6 -3.1 +4.9 +8.0 

204 5.4 1.4 7.8 -4.0 +2.4 +6.4 

207 9.7 4.3 6.4 -5.4 +3.3 +2.1 

208 8.9 3.0 10.5 -5.9 +1.6 +7.5 
210 5.6 2.8 8.4 -2.8 +2.8 +5.6 

212 9.1 2.5 10.0 -6.6 +0.9 +7.5 

213 5.1 1.5 11.0 -3.6 +5.9 +9.5 

214 6.3 2.9 8.4 -3.4 +2.1 +5.5 

215 7.4 3.3 8.8 -4.1 +1.4 +5.5 

216 8.1 3.1 9.3 -5.0 +1.2 +6.2 

217 9.2 2.7 11.5 -6.5 +2.3 +8.8 

Means 7.3 2.7 9.3 -4.6 +2.6 +6.6 
Range = 0-12 

Control subjects were administered the test only once. 



35 






^ 




c 

CO 

co 




to 
(/> 
CD 

c 

'a 
a 

03 

I 






^ 



!-> 





3 
CO 



c 
< 



3 

to 



en 



O 

-C 
Q. 
I 

*-> 
<s> 
O 

a 



O 

o 

-C 
a 

i 

CD 



CD 

■D 
CD 
cn 

CD 



O 
CD 

3 
to 



OJ 






to 

O 

.Q. 

CD 
Q- 



CO 

cb 



co 

CD 



36 




CO 
CO 

<D 
C 
"D 
ro 

CO 




3 
00 





CD 

E 
'a 

a 

03 






en 



O 

O 

JZ 

Q. 

I 

■t- 1 
(/) 
O 

a 



L. 


O 


CD 


-C 


CT> 


Q. 


C 


1 


< 


as 




a 




r^ 




T3 




CU 




CT> 




03 




■hJ 




O 




CD 








J3 




3 




a) 




i- 




O 




h— 




03 




•M 




03 


■M 


X3 


3 


•f-" 


a> 


O 


to 


CD 


5 






ro 




03 




'o 




03 




M — 




■l— i 




to 




O 




Cl 




CD 




L_ 




Q_ 

1 




1 




d) 




Li. 


k_ 




ro 




CD 





37 





3 
C/) 



c 
■o 

CO 





CD 

C 

'q. 

Q. 

co 

X 





3 

CD 




Q. 
I 



O 

Q. 



_CD 

O 

O 

-C 
Q. 
i 
CD 



CD 

T3 
CD 

en 

CD 



O 



<T5 



CD 



to 
O 

Q. 

CD 
1_ 
CL 



05 



38 





3 

00 



CO 





en 





in 

3 







a 
i 

s 



o 

.c 
a 

i 



"8 

E 

3 

CM 



tg 
+-• 
to 

■o 



ca 

75 
o 

9 

a 

© 
a. 






CO 

cu 



39 





3 
C/3 





0) 
OJ 

c 

< 





to 

3 

en 




JO 



o 

o 

-C 
CL 

I 

to 
O 

CL 



o 
o 

-C 
Q. 
I 

0J 
L. 

a 



T3 
en 

CD 

CD 

■>-< 
O 

CD 

1q 

3 

CO 



CO 
+-« 
03 



u 

CD 



o 

03 



to 

O 

a 

!_ 
CL. 

! 



41 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



Anderson, S., et al., CIRCUS: Comprehensive Assessment in Nursery 
School and Kindergarten. Proceedings of the American Psychological 
Association (Symposium) 1973. Reprinted by Educational Testing Ser- 
vice, Princeton, N. J., 1973. 

Baer, D., M. Wolf, and T. Risley, "Some Current Dimensions of Applied 
Behavior Analysis," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol. 2, 
1969, pp. 119-124. 

Barker, P., and S. Pelavin, Issues of Reliability and Directional Bias 
in Standardized Tests: The Case of MAT70, The Rand Corporation, 
P-5689, 1976. 

Beatty, W. H. (ed.), Improving Educational Assessment and an Inventory 
of Affective Behavior , Association for Supervision and Curriculum 
Development, National Education Association, Washington, D.C., 1969. 

Berman, P., and M. McLaughlin, Federal Programs Supporting Educational 
Change 3 Vol. IV: The Findings in Review, The Rand Corporation, 
R-1589/4-HEW, 1975. 



, Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change 3 Vol. VIII: 

Implementing and Sustaining Innovations, The Rand Corporation, 
R-1589/8-HEW, 1978. 

Berry, S. H., and S. M. Genensky, Visual Environmental Adaptation Prob- 
lems of the Partially Sighted: Questionnaire Codebook and Mobility 
Rating Form, Santa Monica Hospital Medical Center, CPS-101-HEW, 
January 1979. 

Bijou, S., and R. Peterson, "Methodology for Experimental Studies of 
Children in Natural Settings," Psychological Record, Vol. 19, 1969, 
pp. 177-210. 

Bikson, T. H. , Classroom Observation: A Case Study in Obtrusiveness, 
The Rand Corporation, P-5804, February 1977. 

Bikson, T. K. , "Social and Personal Development," in S. Raizen, S. 
Bobrow, T. K. Bikson, J. Butler, K. Heald, and J. Ratteray (eds.), 

Design for a National Evaluation of Social Competence in Head Start 
Children, The Rand Corporation, R-1557-HEW, 1974. 

Bikson, T. K. , T. H. Bikson, and S. M. Genensky, Interactive Classroom 
Television Systems: Educational Impact on Partially Sighted Students , 
The Rand Corporation, P-5933, 1978. 



, The Impact of Interactive Classroom Systems on the Educational 

Experiences of Severely Visually Impaired Students, The Rand Corpora- 
tion, R-2395-HEW, September 1979. 



42 



Blakemore, C, and R. C. Van Sluyters, "Experimental Analysis of 

Amblyopia and Strabismus," Brit. J. Ophthalmol., Vol. 58, 1974, pp. 
176-182. 

Bogen, J. C, "Educational Implications of Hemispheric Specialization," 

UCLA Educator, Vol. 17, 1975, pp. 24-32. 

Brewer, G. D. , and J. S. Kakalik, Handicapped Children: Strategies for 
Improving Services, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1979. 

Buros, 0. K. (ed.), The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook, Gryphon 
Press, Highland Park, N.J., 1972. 

Campbell, D., and J. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental De- 
signs for Research, Rand McNally and Company, Chicago, 1963. 

Cazden, C. B., "On Individual Differences in Language Competence and 
Performance," Journal of Special Education, Vol. 1, 1967, pp. 39-42. 

CIRCUS: A Comprehensive Program of Assessment Services for Preprimary 
Children, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N.J., 1974. 

Crain, R. L. , and R. Mahard, Desegregation and Black Achievement, The 
Rand Corporation, P-6129, 1977. 

Deutsch, M. P., "The Disadvantaged Child and the Learning Process," in 
A. H. Passow (ed.), Education in Depressed Areas, Bureau of Publica- 
tions, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, 1963. 

Ekman, P., "Differential Communication of Affect by Head and Body Cues," 
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 2, 1965, pp. 
726-735. 

Ekman, P., and W. Friesen, Unmasking the Face, Prentice Hall, Inc., 
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1975. 

Epstein, W. , I. Rock, and C. B. Zuckerman, "Meaning and Familiarity 
in Verbal Learning," Psychological Monographs, XIV, No. 491, 1960. 

Feshbach, N. , and K. Roe, "Empathy in Six- and Seven-Year Olds," Child 
Development, Vol. 39, 1968, pp. 133-145. 

Fisher, R. A., The Design of Experiments , Seventh Ed., Hafner Publish- 
ing Company, New York, 1960. 

Genensky, S. M. , Some Comments on a Closed Circuit TV System for the 
Visually Handicapped, The Rand Corporation, P-3984, December 1968. 
Also published in The Optometric Weekly, Vol. 60, No. 14, April 3, 
1969, American Journal of Optometry and Archives of American Academy 
of Optometry, Vol. 46, No. 7, July 1969, pp. 519-524, and Hearing 
before the Subcommittee on Education of the Committee on Labor and 
Public Welfare, United States Senate, 91st Congress, 1st Session on 
S.1611 to amend Public Law 85-905 to provide for a National Center 



43 



on Educational Media and Materials for the Handicapped and for Other 
Purposes, April 23, 1969, pp. 45-48. 

, Closed Circuit TV and the Education of the Partially Sighted, 

The Rand Corporation, P-4343, March 1970. Also published in Educa- 
tional Technology , Vol. 10, No. 8, August 1970, pp. 27-31. 

, A Functional Classification System of the Visually Impaired to 

Replace the Legal Definition of Blindness , The Rand Corporation, 
RM-6246-RC, April 1970. Also published in Annals of Ophthalmology, 
Vol. 3, No. 2, February 1971, pp. 150-154, and American Journal of 
Optometry and Archives of American Academy of Optometry , Vol. 48, 
No. 8, August 1971, pp. 631-642. 

, Binoculars: A Long-Ignored Aid for the Partially Sighted, The 

Rand Corporation, R-1402-HEW, November 1973. Also published in 
American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, Vol. 51, 
No. 9, November 1974, pp. 648-670. 

, Acuity Measurements — Do They Indicate How Well a Partially 

Sighted Person Functions or Could Function!, The Rand Corporation, 
P-5887, January 1976. Also published in American Journal of Optometry 
and Physiological Optics, Vol. 53, No. 12, 1976, pp. 809-812. 

, "Data Concerning the Partially Sighted and the Functionally 

Blind," Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness , Vol. 72, No. 15, 
May 1978, pp. 177-180. 

Genensky, S. M. , P. Baran, H. L. Moshin, and H. Steingold, A Closed 
Circuit TV System for the Visually Handicapped, The Rand Corporation, 
RM-5672-RC, August 1968. Also published in Research Bulletin of the 
American Foundation for the Blind, No. 19, June 1969, pp. 191-204. 

Genensky, S. M. , T. H. Bikson, and T. K. Bikson, Visual Environmental 
Adaptation Problems of the Partially Sighted: Final Report, Santa 
Monica Hospital Center, CPS-100-HEW, January 1979. 

Genensky, S. M. , R. W. Clewett, and H. E. Petersen, An X-Y Platform for 
RANDSIGHT-Type Instruments, The Rand Corporation, R-831-HEW/RC, 
August 1971. 

Genensky, S. M. , J. S. Kakalik, G. D. Brewer, L. A. Dougharty, P. D. 
Fleischauer, and L. M. Wallen, Improving Services to Hearing and 
Vision Handicapped Youth, The Rand Corporation, R-1420-HEW, February 
1974. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. L. Moshin, and H. Steingold, A Closed Circuit TV 
System for the Visually Handicapped and Prospects for Future Research, 
The Rand Corporation, P-4147, July 1969. Also published in Annals 
of Ophthalmology , Vol. 2, No. 3, June 1970, pp. 303-308. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. L. Moshin, and H. E. Petersen, Performance of Par- 
tially Sighted with RANDSIGHT I Equipped with an X-Y Platform, The 



44 



Rand Corporation, P-4943, January 1973. Also published in American 
Journal of Optometry and Archives of American Academy of Optometry, 
Vol. 50, No. 10, October 1973, pp. 782-800. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. W. Clewett, and H. L. Mo shin, A 

Double X-Y Platform for RANDSIGHT-Type Instruments , The Rand Corpora- 
tion, R-1614-HEW, December 1974. 



, Information Transfer Problems of the Partially Sighted: Recent 

Results and Project Summary, The Rand Corporation, R-1770-HEW, June 
1975. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, H. L. Moshin, R. W. Clewett, and R. I. 
Yoshimura, Advances in Closed Circuit TV Systems for the Partially 
Sighted, The Rand Corporation, R-1040-HEW/RC, April 1972. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. I. Yoshimura, and R. W. Clewett, 
A Second Generation Interactive Classroom Television System for the 
Partially Sighted, The Rand Corporation, R-2138-HEW, June 1977. Also 
published in Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, February 
1978, pp. 41-45; American Journal of Optometry and Physiological 
Optics, Vol. 55, No. 9, September 1978, pp. 615-626. 

Genensky, S. M. , H. E. Petersen, R. I. Yoshimura, J. B. von der Lieth, 
R. W. Clewett, and H. L. Moshin, Interactive Classroom TV System for 
the Handicapped, The Rand Corporation, R-1537-HEW, June 1974. 

Gotts, E. E., Indiana Perceptual Development Battery (Sub-test 1). 

University of Indiana Institute for Child Study, Bloomington, Indiana, 
1971. 

Haber, R. N. , "Repetition as a Determinant of Perceptual Recognition 
Processes," in R. N. Haber (ed.), Information-Processing Approaches 
to Visual Perception, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1969. 

Haggert, S. A., "Program Budgeting for School District Planning," 
Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1972. 

Hall, J. F., Verbal Learning and Retention, J. B. Lippincott, Philadel- 
phia, 1971. 

Hammond, P. A., Chairman, "Summer Drop-off as Beheld by Several Eyes," 
Symposium presented to the American Educational Research Association, 
1979. 

Henderson, E. , B. Long, and R. Ziller, "Self-social Constructs of 
Achieving and Nonachieving Readers," Reading Teacher (19), 1965, 
pp. 114-118. 

Henderson, R. W. and J. R. Bergan, The Cultural Context of Childhood, 
Charles E. Merrill, Columbus, Ohio, 1976. 

Heussenstamm, J. R. , and R. Noepfner, Interperson Perception Test, 
Monitor Press, Los Angeles, 1969. 



45 



Hewett, Frank M. , Emotionally Disturbed Children in the Classroom: A 
Developmental Strategy for Educating Children with Maladaptive Be- 
havior, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1968. 

Huneck, J., and T. H. Bikson, Visual Equality (16 mm film or video- 
tape), John Huneck Productions, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, 
1978. 

Hunt, J., The Challenge of Incompetence and Poverty , University of 
Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois, 1969. 

Jensen, J., and L. Kohlberg, "Report of a Research and Demonstration 
Project for Culturally Disadvantaged Children in the Ancona Montessori 
School," Office of Education Report Number 1284, Washington, D.C., 
1966. (Available through ERIC.) 

Kakalik, J. S., G. D. Brewer, L. A. Dougharty, P. D. Fleischauer, and 
S. M. Genensky, Services for Handicapped Youth: A Program Overview, 
The Rand Corporation, R-1220-HEW, May 1973. 



, Services for Handicapped Youth: A Program Overview, The Rand 

Corporation, R-1220-HEW (Abridged), May 1973. 

Katzenmeyer, W. G. , and A. J. Stenner, "Strategic Uses of Random Sub- 
Sample Replication and a Coefficient of Factor Relicability ," Educa- 
tional and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 35, No. 1, Spring 1975, 
pp. 19-29. 

Laurendeau, 24., and A. Pinard, The Development of the Concept of Space 
in the Child, International University Press, New York, 1970. 

Mackworth, J. , "The Relation Between the Visual Image and Post-Percep- 
tual Immediate Memory," in R. N. Haber (ed.), Information-Processing 
Approaches to Visual Perception, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New 
York, 1969. 

McLaughlin, M. , "Implementation as Mutual Adaptation," in W. Williams 
and R. Elmore (eds.), Social Program Implementation, Academic Press, 
New York, 1976. 

Nie, N. H., C. H. Hull, J. G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner, and D. H. Bent, 
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 2d ed., McGraw-Hill, 
New York, 1975. 

Paivio, A., Imagery and Verbal Process, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 
New York, 1971. 

Parsekevopoulos, J. N., and S. A. Kirk, The Development and Psychometric 
Characteristics of the Revised Illinois Tests of Psycholinguistic 
Abilities, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois, 1969. 

Petersen, H. E. , R. W. Clewett, and H. L. Moshin, A Double X-Y Platform 
for RANDSIGHT-Type Instruments, The Rand Corporation, R-1614-HEW, 
December 1974. 



46 



Petersen, H. E. , R. I. Yoshimura, J. B. von der Lieth, R. W. Clewett, 
and H. L. Moshin, Interactive Classroom TV System for the Handicapped, 
The Rand Corporation, R-1537-HEW, June 1974. 

Risley, T., and M. Cataldo, Planned Activity Check, Center for Applied 
Behavior Analysis, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, 1973. 

Rosenthal, R. , et al . , "Assessing Sensitivity to Nonverbal Communica- 
tion: The PONS Test," Newsletter, American Psychological Association 
Division 8, January 1974. 

Severson, R. , and K. Guest, "Toward the Standardized Assessment of the 
Language of Disadvantaged Children," in F. Williams (ed.), Language 
and Poverty, Markham Publishing Company, Chicago, 1970. 

Siegel, S., Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1956. 

Singer, H., H. Gerard, and D. Redfearn, "Achievement," in H. Gerard and 
N. Miller (eds.), School Desegregation, Plenum Press, New York, 1975. 

Walker, D., Socio emotional Measures for Preschool and Kindergarten 
Children, Jossey Bass Publishers, San Francisco, 1973. 

Wechsler, D., The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, 
4th ed., Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Maryland, 1958. 

Ziller, R. C, The Social Self, Pergamon Press, Oxford, England, 1973. 

Ziller, R. C, et al., "Self-Esteem: A Self-Social Construct," Journal 
of Consulting Psychology (33), 1969, pp. 84-95. 



HV5702 Bikson, Thomas H. , c.l 
B490 Tora K. Bikson and Samuel 

M. Genensky. 
TELEVISION-MEDIATED EDUCATION FOR 
THE VISUALLY IHPAIjRED . . . (1979) 



HV1702 
B4 90 



c.l 



Biks on, Thomas H. , Tnr^ 
K. Bikson and Samuel M. Genensky. 
TELEVISIQN-MEDIATF.n ^EDUCATION 
FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED..." 
(™7^ 




I 

ON 



H 
M 

w 
< 

H 
CO 
H 
O 

a 



> M 



H 
W 

a 

M 

a 









a o 

H |> 

2 H 

> M 

P O 

H 

< o 
co 

H H 

O M 
> 

H < 



O 
3 



> 
H 
PC 
W 

a 



o 

3